About your Search

20130201
20130228
STATION
MSNBCW 31
LANGUAGE
English 31
Search Results 0 to 30 of about 31 (some duplicates have been removed)
to lead the pentagon while we are at war. republicans have never before felt the need to filibuster a cabinet nominee in the history of the country but apparently this is the guy worth waiting 224 years to spring it on. it has never happened before, but why not now? heck. the white house is not pleased. quote, today's action runs against both the majority will of the senate and our nation's interest. this waste of time is not without consequence. we have 66,000 men and women deployed in afghanistan and we need our new secretary of defense to be part of significant decisions about how we bring that war to a responsible end. next week is brussels the united states will meet with allies to talk about transition in afghanistan at the nato defense ministerial. for the sake of national security it's time to stop playing politics with our department of defense and to move beyond the distractions and delay. allow this war hero an up or down vote and let our troops have the secretary of defense they deserve. remember when the top democrat in the senate harry reid declared just a few weeks ag
at the department of defense. let's ask the military. >> ask you for an update on pentagon drone operations. >> probably not. >> well, let's hear what you have to say when i ask the question. >> okay. >> it has now been widely acknowledged that the u.s. military earlier this year, the military, pentagon, flew drone operations over pakistan's border region in cooperation with the pakistanis to collect reconnaissance information and show it to them. can you talk about why the u.s. military is now flying drone operations or did fly drone operations over pakistan? >> i can't. i know you say it's widely acknowledged. i don't know how widely anything has been acknowledged on that count. i don't think it's appropriate for me at this podium to discuss operations that may or may not be taking place. >> what concerns do you have that these u.s. government drone strikes in pakistan may be backfiring now and simply creating more enemies of the united states? >> i refer your questions to other people. that's not something we speak to or are involved in. >> who would you refer them to, jeff? where should
it all down is now the hard right battle cry. slash spending, short the pentagon. crew up traffic control whatever raises the noise level, bashes the democrats and lowers hope. is this the tea party dream? is this john boehner's version of feeding time at the zoo, giving the crazies what they want so they will sit in their seats and behave? is this final payment to insanity the last vestige of what calm republicanism is ready to cough up? but how else can you explain the readiness of the gop leadership to let this fraken stein's monster, it doomsday machine, this sequestration go all out berserk? how else can we understand the party of lincoln doing such economic damage to the republic, such damage and moral to the people. democrat ed rendell and republican michael steele. gentlemen, i want to start with you, michael, because i know you will disagree with me and that's what this is about. i read a lot of good reporting today, not analysis, but good reporting from your side of the aisle, further right than you i believe, that says, great, let's have sequestration. let's short the pentagon.
? >> at the pentagon. >> this is the first time hearing of this. when did this happen? did they make this decision on the cruise ship? >> no. no, they didn't. it actually happened in washington. >> really? that's fascinating. >> which is its own permanent port-a-potty. >> okay. mika, for those of us that were just sitting there looking at a cruise ship for 24 hours instead of following the real news, why don't you catch us up with what actually happened yesterday in the news. >> republicans blocked a vote yesterday that would have ended the debate and allowed for a final decision one way or another. democrats fell just shy of the votes needed to advance the process. something president obama chalked up to partisan politics. >> there's nothing in the constitution that says that somebody should get 60 votes. there are only a handful of instances in which there's been any kind of filibuster of anybody for a cabinet position in our history. and what seems to be happening -- and this has been growing over time -- is the republican minority in the senate seem to think that the rule now is that you have
them to be moved from the cia back to the pentagon. but the fact is that there has been something like a 700% increase in the use of drones under president obama as compared to george w. bush. >> and andrea, as you know, from your sources at the agency and i know from my sources not only from the agency but in the entire intelligence community when barack obama came into office, they specifically said, they wanted to ramp up drone operations. and they wanted there to be a side-by-side comparison of how many strikes bush did versus how many strikes they did. for brennan to say that he wants to pull back on drone strikes, that's just -- that's just not accurate. and that's not what's been happening since january 20th, 2009. you can go back. and when the history is written, you will go back to january 20th, 2009, and see a very deliberate -- >> executive orders. >> executive orders. and again, i think most americans probably support this policy. so it's not like i'm talking about anything that's going to be scandalous. most people will support the president doing this. but it obviously ca
thing is, running the pentagon is a hard job. people failed at it before. the largest bureaucracy we have in the government, one of the largest workforces in the world. i mean, it's a hugely complicated thing to do administratively, logistically, politically. strong centers of power in that building, right? i have no idea whether chuck hagel is up to it, nor does anyone. none of that has been lit gaited at all. he talked to al jazeera once, gave speeches to. the actual job the guy is going to do, i don't know if i have a dog in the fight. do i care if chuck hagel is running the pentagon? as far as i can tell, no one has done much in congress to sort of sort that out. >> and the one thing that job, is a policymaker. that is not the person who decides whether we go to war but takes the orders from the white house about how to implement it. that is not the person who decides what our relationship is with any other foreign country. those issues belong in other jobs. that's what they made the whole hearing about. >> no, absolutely. and even their fixation on benghazi is located in state.
, and will be sworn in and take over at that time pentagon. chuck hagel had the majority support, all the republicans in the senate, and the majority. it took this long to get him confirmed because republicans filibustered his nomination. nobody has ever done that before. nobody has ever before used a filibuster to block the confirmation of a cabinet nominee, ever in the history of our country, but they did it to chuck hagel. why? who knows? republicans in the senate pulled the fire alarm on this one, they broke glass in case of emergency. they did something that has never been done before in the history of the republic. and because they did it, there is now precedent for them to filibuster the next nominee. they broke glass for a nominee who in his case had bipartisan support to be confirmed. and the republicans in the senate did it in a way that didn't actually stop the confirmation. so you won nothing. but you did further break the institution where you work. there is an effort already under way to try to cover this up to say republicans did not really filibuster chuck hagel but they didn't really
out of federal programs and the pentagon. 800,000 civilian employees have been told by the defense department that they will likely be placed on unpaid leave. with the house and senate still in recess, a number of democrats are calling for congress to reconvene to deal with this mess. secretary of state john kerry, meanwhi meanwhile, is reminding his former colleagues that actions here at home do have global implications. take a listen. >> it is often said that we cannot be strong at home if we're not strong in the world. but in these days of a looming budget sequester that everyone actually wants to avoid, or most, we can't be strong in the world unless we are strong at home. my credibility is a diplomat, working to help other countries create order is strongest when america, at last, puts its own fiscal house in order. and that has to be now. let's reach a responsible agreement that prevents these senseless consults. let's not lose this opportunity because of politics. >> you know, mike barnicle, politics is such a cruel, cruel game. seriously. there's one guy that gets to the to
're going to cut pretty significantly from the pentagon's budget. your move, mr. president. >> he wants revenues to go up again and john boehner's response is, we just did that. >> that's the thing. we always heard, you guys raise taxes, cut defense spending and then we will come back with a compromise on spending cuts. but, no, we raise taxes, we come forward with pentagon cuts and the president comes back with, we want to tax more americans. let's raise taxes again. >> you wonder where this ends now then, right, because if the president's not going to go anywhere without more revenue, where does this take us? we have the plan in place that was supposed to do both of those things. we're at that point on friday and we will hit it and neither side is going to get to it. what's the end game here. >> how do you think this is goin going? >> it's going terribly. >> republicans always lose these budget battles. i get a sense for the first time the president is overplaying his hand. talking about fear and loathing, locusts ascending from the heavens, now talking about more tax cuts, your dog w
the pentagon. like don't cut a single thing, but i'm going to go out, i'm going to keep talking about rich americans. i'm going to keep talking about corporations. i'm going to play to my base instead of talking -- telling middle-class americans they're going to have to make some sacrifices. along with the rich. it's that mika, it's a permanent campaign. and i guess if this is how he wants to run things, he's president of the united states, good luck over the next 3 1/2 years. >> i don't understand why loopholes are even an argument, first of all, why he has to go this far. why he has to keep talking about it. >> hold on a second. >> i know. >> we all agree that these loopholes need to be closed. >> well, let's do it. why is it so hard? >> i've been talking about supporting warren buffett's idea. >> why are we still talking about it? >> because the president only uses it to demagogue in a permanent campaign. he never talks about the other side of it. he always says oh, it's the rich. >> that would be loopholes. >> don't tax you, don't tax me, tax the rich guy behind the tree. >> steny hoye
in the private sector, including serving on the board of a major contractor with the pentagon. mr. gates gave speeches, lots of them, for which he was paid plenty. but when bob gates testified before the senate, the subject of his private sector earnings never came up. after five hours of non-confrontational questions, the committee volt ford him unanimously. and then when it went to the full senate they confirmed him 95-2. the nominee before, that remember this guy? donald rumsfeld, 2001. donald rumsfeld, of course, had made zillions in the private sector. he sat on the board of a company that was believed to have won a giant contract to help north korea build nuclear reactors. but when donald rumsfeld testified before the senate, they didn't ask about the stock that he held or his roles in international business. they didn't even ask about the north korean reactors. they recommended his nomination to the full senate where he was confirmed in another vote of 95-2. so if history has anything to say about it, then what's happening to chuck hagel right now is not at all normal. it is not the re
to vote today on hagel's nomination to head the pentagon, but that vote has been postponed after republicans said they hadn't received sufficient information about hagel's financial records and specifically about any payments he's received from foreign sources. that's an odd hurdle given that republicans never seem concerned about foreign revenue sources when it came to nominees from george w. bush. one democratic official working on the hagel nomination told politico, quote, what they're asking is unprecedented, and it's clear that it's information that he's unable to provide. hagel says he can't provide it because it would violate confidentiality of the boards that he serves on. of course, critics say this is about more than incomplete financial records. so why are republicans really holding up hagel's nomination? aaron david miller is vice president for new initiatives at the woodrow wilson center. he has served as an adviser on the middle east to both democratic and republican secretaries of state. and joe klein is a columnist for "time" magazine. gentlemen, buzz feed pointed
to charlie's child and to her wife. >> right. >> those benefits, the pentagon no matter how much they want to, they can't do those things. >> right. >> because they are precluded by law because of doma. >> and secretary panetta and the president, they did all they could under the law. and that's what a lot of people don't understand. here is another story charlie told me. she said when she was doing her live interview, she also went to see her then congressman from new hampshire. and she told her story. and the congressman said oh, but you're okay. you live in new hampshire. you're legally married in new hampshire. that's legal. so you're taken care of. so her congressman didn't even know that her wife was treated as a second class citizen and didn't enjoy the benefits that other military families enjoyed. so if the congressman didn't know, you know, the american public has no idea. so we need to continue telling charlie's story. >> the reason that i wanted to play that particular clip of her lobbying gene shaheen there, gene shaheen obviously somebody who has been very supportive of her. but
in the words of the secretary of defense destroys the pentagon. >> everybody hates this thing. but in addition to hating this thing and agreeing that it is a bad idea, it would be very bad for the country and we shouldn't do it, they also all agree that it's the other guy's fault. president obama held a press conference this week in which he said it was the republicans holding the country hostage. meanwhile, republicans have tried to make this a household word, obamaquester. john boehner really wanted to lay the sequester at the feet of the president, the obamaquester, they want you to call it. it might have worked if it were true. the daily beast uncovered this power point slide from a year and a half ago, using it to try to sell republicans on the sequester deal. this power point presentation boasting about all the ways that sequestration was good for republicans, and how they, republicans should vote for it because there was a lot to like, because it look, sets up a new sequestration process to cut spending across the board. we like that. vote for that. maybe we should call it the boehnerqu
connell's office? not quite. the senator bucked the question to the pentagon, and here is a look at the letter courtesy of "wired" magazine. i am writing on behalf of a constituent who has contacted me regarding guantanamo bay prisoners receiving post-9/11 gi bill benefits. i would appreciate your review and response to my constituent's concern. well, in some alternate reality where the whole thing were true, wouldn't it be more than a single constituent's concern that gi benefits were going to terrorists? anyway, somebody in mcconnell's office called it a humorous misunderstanding. you think? another headline on duffle blog's site reads, syria to host iraq war re-enactors. what people will believe. the gullible out there. >>> up next, the republican party has lurched too far to the right. it's one thing to hear a democrat say it, but a republican? and that's ahead. you're watching "hardball," the place for politics. now, here's one that will make you feel alive. meet the five-passenger ford c-max hybrid. c-max says ha. c-max says wheeee. which is what you get, don't you see? cause c-max has l
that will happen as a result. and that would be pentagon comptroller robert hale taking it in strit he told "the washington post." look when i walk doul the hall, people still wave but with fewer fingers. isn't he nice. >>> up next, republican governors are reversing course and em braying the barack obama maek plan. the latest to do was one of obama care's latest critics, that sweetheart down in florida, governor rick scott who know likes. and the man scott replaced as governor joins us here, charlie chris crist. you've watching "hardball" the place for politics. a hybrid? most are just no fun to drive. now, here's one that will make you feel alive. meet the five-passenger ford c-max hybrid. c-max says ha. c-max says wheeee. which is what you get, don't you see? cause c-max has lots more horsepower than prius v, a hybrid that c-max also bests in mpg. say hi to the all-new 47 combined mpg c-max hybrid. i just served my mother-in-law your chicken noodle soup but she loved it so much... i told her it was homemade. everyone tells a little white lie now and then. but now she wants my recipe [ clears
this command, cyber command, saying we have to defend our infrastructure, and the pentagon's infrastructure to be sure, and then we have to have capability. those kinds will help deter some of the activities taking place right now. >> i remember once interviewing a former french official who was in charge of the french intelligence operation against our splekt wal property and trade secrets, and he was very open about it as a retired espionage agent for france. thank you very much, bill cohen. >> good to be with you. >> up neck, fighting that cyber war, we talk to former homeland security chief michael cherthoff. up for an oscar and detained at the airport? you're watching "andrea mitchell reports" only on msnbc. commitment to the gulf. and every day since, we've worked hard to keep it. today, the beaches and gulf are open for everyone to enjoy. we've shared what we've learned, so we can all produce energy more safely. bp's also committed to america. we support nearly two-hundred-fifty thousand jobs and invest more here than anywhere else. we're working to fuel america for generations to co
there starts to end. the headline news out of brussels today was a very terse statement from the pentagon spokesman. it was kind of strange. he was essentially clarifying, hey, whatever you heard from the germans earlier today, that was not true. this is the statement. the reports that the u.s. told allies that we are considering 8,000 to 12,000 u.s. troops after 2014 are not correct. a range of 8,000 to 12,000 troops was discussed, but it was discussed as the possible size of the overall nato mission, not the u.s. contribution. ah, important clarification. so the defense minister from germany had apparently told reporters that 8 to 12,000 troops was how many troops america was going to keep in afghanistan. everybody thought that was very big news since that's not what we heard hear at home at all. maybe that is how the german guy understood it, but it is apparently not the way that leon panetta meant it. that was the headline out of brussels today. those troops, that's nato combined, that's not just us. that was the headline. the other news of course was that representing the united stat
the whacks at the pentagon in the interest of cutting spending overall. who would have expected this? apparently the president didn't. and can the republicans get away with it? republicans in two key states are up to something now they're not giving up on schemes to rejigger the electoral college. they're out to help their candidates next time. republicans figure if they can't win in the system they're just out to change it. they're flag grant about it. >>> last in the os carries is about all of us. america is back in a winning mood. >>> finally in case you didn't realize it, michelle obama has got moves. ♪ that cross dresser there on the left of course is jimmy fallon. the first lady's evolution of mom dancing with jimmy fallon. that's tonight in the "sideshow." and this is "hardball," the place for politics. and every day since, we've worked hard to keep it. today, the beaches and gulf are open for everyone to enjoy. we've shared what we've learned, so we can all produce energy more safely. bp's also committed to america. we support nearly two-hundred-fifty thousand jobs and inve
at the pentagon in the interest of cutting spending overall. who would have expected this? apparently the president didn't. and can the republicans get away with it? >>> republicans in two key states are up to something now. they're not giving up on schemes to rejigger the electoral college. they're out to help their candidates next time. republicans figure if they can't win in the system, they're just out to change it. they're flagrant about it. >>> last, the oscars is about all of us. america is back in a winning mood. >>> finally, in case you didn't realize it, michelle obama has got moves. ♪ that cross dresser there on the left, of course, is jimmy fallon. the first lady's evolution of mom dancing with jimmy fallon. that's tonight in the "sideshow." and this is "hardball," the place for politics. if there was a pill to help protect your eye health as you age... would you take it? well, there is. [ male announcer ] it's called ocuvite. a vitamin totally dedicated to your eyes, from the eye care experts at bausch + lomb. as you age, eyes can lose vital nutrients. ocuvite helps rep
take some hits at the pentagon and federal programs you can blame the republicans for or would you rather go out and sign onto a cut in medicare that hurts every one of your people, ticks off most of your party? makes you look like you have given the store away. if you're barack obama politician, maybe you're thinking maybe i can dig the sequester after all and this is the problem. everyone says they hate sequestration, everybody would rather have it than have to do something they really, really don't want to do. i'm joined by the nation's john nichols and michael shearer with "time." the reason we're probably going to have sequestration, we're probably going to have all kinds of problems is because it's better than having to do what you don't want to do. republicans don't want to raise taxes. democrats don't want to touch the entitlements. >> i agree with that but i think it's better in short term. the republicans and the white house have cal vat clated and only one will be right if they let this happen they will be in a stronger position in two weeks going into a government shutd
see it as an opportunity to slim down the pentagon while republicans are applauding real efforts to shrink the government. however, the white house continues to paint a dire picture. attorney general eric holder says the across the board cuts will make the nation -- listen to me -- less safe. >> oh my lord. >> the justice department is going to lose 9% of its budget between now and september 30th. we'll lose $1.6 billion. there are not going to be as many fbi agents, atf agents, dea agents, prosecutors able to do their jobs as we would like them to do. this is something that will have an impact on the safety of this country and anybody who says that's not true is either lying or saying something that runs contrary to the facts. >> cramer, real quick? >> the sequester is a real bad word. sequester because 99% of american people don't understand it. i hate to use the word on "mad money." i hate it. sequester. >> don't use it. >> you can't. >> birthday cake. we can rename it birthday cake. >> fiscal cliff worked. it had great imagery. >> did you see the story on the front page of "t
the sequester in a hurry, then yes, it's a real problem because it doesn't let the pentagon begin to plan and distribute, if you will, the cuts. but at the end of the day, whether it's defense spending, education spending, health spending, what always matters more than how much you spend is how you spend it. and so i'm not, at the end of the day, all that worried about how much we spend, whether it's on defense or anything else. you just want to have the time to make some intelligent cuts rather than have to make them literally in a matter of days which would probably mean that readiness more than anything else would be cut out of the defense department account. and that's probably the one thing you don't want cut out of it. >> sam stein, you're close and yet so far away over there at the jump seat. what are the odds that the sequester actually takes place? we know the president's proposed something to push them back a while. are we going to see these kind of cuts, the ones that were outlined in the sequester proposal? >> i think the odds are pretty high, to be honest. i don't think there
in discretionary. we could actually clean all the waste out of the pentagon which is well over $100 billion a year. it still doesn't solve our problem. we cannot solve our problem unless we change medicare to save it and put a competitive model into our health care system that will allocate that scarce resource. it's really interesting. just yesterday the cms has finished going through all this bidding on durable medical equipment. and the statement coming from cms, for the first time, is hey, we just figured out competition works. about a 41% savings on durable medical equipment not just for the federal government but for the seniors who are going to be doing their co-pay. so competition works. and if it will work -- it works in this area, health care will work in the rest. we've just got to have a little pain. that happened to me as a child frequently with a popular switch. >> okay. well, there you go. >> there's a bumper sticker for 2014. >> chuck, good morning. senator, good morning. chuck, quick question for you. what are the odds you place on sequester going through and two, a government shu
is that the pentagon signed deals before the end of the year worth about $5 billion to make sure that the money was flowing before the sequester. >> $400 billion for this one weapon program. >> that's a lot of dough. >> that is a lot of dough. the cover is "the once and future pope." rick stengel, thanks for being with us. >>> coming up next, the first pictures of olympian and double amputee sprinter oscar pistorius after he's accused of shooting and killing his girlfriend. this is a guy who was the hero of london, sort of the field-good story last summer. now he is in jail accused of murder. we're going to have the latest straight ahead on "morning joe." [ woman ] ring. ring. progresso. i just served my mother-in-law your chicken noodle soup but she loved it so much... i told her it was homemade. everyone tells a little white lie now and then. but now she wants my recipe [ clears his throat ] [ softly ] she's right behind me isn't she? [ male announcer ] progresso. you gotta taste this soup. [ clears his throat ] by earning a degree from capella she'more iuniversity, isn't she? you'll have the
the president for lost funding in federal programs and the pentagon over ten years, should the sequestration take place. house speaker john boehner said, quote, today the president advanced an argument republicans have been making for a year. his sequester is the wrong way to cut spending. senate majority leader mitch mcconnell insisted "more than three months after the november election, president obama still prefers campaign events to common sense, bipartisan action." and joining us now for more on this from washington, the former chief economist of the international monetary fund and bloomberg view columnist, simon johnson. he's the co-author of "white house burning: our national debt and why it matters to you," now out in paperback. simon, good to see you this morning. >> nice to be with you. >> simon, if you could help us through this over the next week or so, it doesn't look like there's a path to avoiding the sequestration if you listen to the two sides. so how damaging would this be? because we've heard a couple different versions of it that would have immediate impacts, more than 75
Search Results 0 to 30 of about 31 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (31 Dec 2014)